From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Artur Paszkiewicz <artur.paszkiewicz@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/7] Allow changing the RWH policy for a running array
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 16:30:38 +0100
Message-ID: <c21e1560-ca0d-67c8-83ca-04d275698d8b@intel.com>
References: <20161205153204.7343-1-artur.paszkiewicz@intel.com>
 <20161205153204.7343-7-artur.paszkiewicz@intel.com>
 <wrfjd1h69hbn.fsf@redhat.com>
 <5c74d40c-36c4-97ae-9a67-be533d6abfb1@intel.com>
 <wrfj1sxl870h.fsf@redhat.com>
 <e90fade8-b904-7834-880d-61e1634e5fed@intel.com>
 <wrfja8c96qo5.fsf@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <wrfja8c96qo5.fsf@redhat.com>
Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-raid.ids

On 12/06/2016 04:08 PM, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> Artur Paszkiewicz <artur.paszkiewicz@intel.com> writes:
>> Sure, I can change that :) If you agree with the rest I'll just resend
>> those two patches.
> 
> Yes, that would be perfect.

OK, but just in case - if you are going to apply them maybe wait until
Shaohua comments on the kernel patches. These mdadm patches won't be any
good if the kernel part doesn't get accepted.

Thanks,
Artur